Re: Bush goes Nuclear!

From: Douglas A. Shrader (dshrader_at_nospam.com)
Date: 07/15/04 

Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 22:35:28 -0500

"Joe Bergeron" <jabergeron@earthlink.nettled> wrote in message
news:140720041643553358%jabergeron@earthlink.nettled...
> In article <0fkaf0p6robih0cr6tfrhip7v6mnueh41r@4ax.com>, Dave Typinski
> <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > Joe Bergeron wrote:
> >
> > >In article <hn99f01143li29c7eu0cfufrp0p78iecph@4ax.com>, Dave Typinski
> > ><nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
> > >
.
> >
> > No military power. He did have, though, the financial means with
> > which to mess with American interests through the proxy of terrorist
> > networks external to Iraq.
>
> He may have had the means, but there's no evidence that he did it. I
> doubt that he was suicidal enough to tempt US retaliation in this way
> when the only thing he could have possibly gained by supporting
> terrorism was a childish sense of revenge.

I keep hearing "Saddam had no connection to Terrorist!", but those who say
that never mention all the known, internationally wanted terrorists that
were captured in Bagdad when the city was taken, sheltered and protected by
Saddam. You should also read this little article
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
particularly this:

Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even
threatened (his words) any American. I never quite know whether Moore is as
ignorant as he looks, or even if that would be humanly possible. Baghdad was
for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the
most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by
the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna* and Rome. Baghdad was the safe
house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer. Saddam
boasted publicly of his financial sponsorship of suicide bombers in Israel.
(Quite a few Americans of all denominations walk the streets of Jerusalem.)
In 1991, a large number of Western hostages were taken by the hideous Iraqi
invasion of Kuwait and held in terrible conditions for a long time. After
that same invasion was repelled-Saddam having killed quite a few Americans
and Egyptians and Syrians and Brits in the meantime and having threatened to
kill many more-the Iraqi secret police were caught trying to murder former
President Bush during his visit to Kuwait. Never mind whether his son should
take that personally. (Though why should he not?) Should you and I not
resent any foreign dictatorship that attempts to kill one of our retired
chief executives? (President Clinton certainly took it that way: He ordered
the destruction by cruise missiles of the Baathist "security" headquarters.)
Iraqi forces fired, every day, for 10 years, on the aircraft that patrolled
the no-fly zones and staved off further genocide in the north and south of
the country. In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the
bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a
guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam. In 2001, Saddam's regime
was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New
York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger
revenge. Its official media regularly spewed out a stream of anti-Semitic
incitement. I think one might describe that as "threatening," even if one
was narrow enough to think that anti-Semitism only menaces Jews. And it was
after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved
from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal
design for a holy and ethnic civil war. On Dec. 1, 2003, the New York Times
reported-and the David Kay report had established-that Saddam had been
secretly negotiating with the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il in a series of
secret meetings in Syria, as late as the spring of 2003, to buy a North
Korean missile system, and missile-production system, right off the shelf.
(This attempt was not uncovered until after the fall of Baghdad, the
coalition's presence having meanwhile put an end to the negotiations.)

You are, quite simply, wrong in your statements and beliefs. We were fully
justified in invading Iraq, and both we and they will be far better off for
it.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bush goes Nuclear!
    ... > terrorism was a childish sense of revenge. ... Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even ... threatened any American. ... Baghdad was the safe ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Bush goes Nuclear!
    ... > terrorism was a childish sense of revenge. ... Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even ... threatened any American. ... Baghdad was the safe ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Bush goes Nuclear!
    ... > terrorism was a childish sense of revenge. ... Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even ... threatened any American. ... Baghdad was the safe ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Lifting the lid on Thai insurgents
    ... After all, it's only terrorism if Great Leaderdeclare it so, and for ... sure American ordnance is, by definition, NOT terrorist weaponry. ... Iraq attacked US? ... Saudi Arabia has gone FAR beyond Saddam in financing and sheltering ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: Lifting the lid on Thai insurgents
    ... about' class of sub-humanoids of Baghdad can be called 'collateral ... After all, it's only terrorism if Great Leaderdeclare it so, and for ... Iraq attacked US? ... Saudi Arabia has gone FAR beyond Saddam in financing and sheltering ...
    (soc.culture.thai)